You have to listen, everyone is helping the victims. I can care less if you don't believe me. I read the entire thread before I even said anything. Plenty people said that you are covered even the owner of the site. Me telling Teddy to give him his $300 back is not helping him. That is the best way to handle and get out of the situation for Teddy.
Buckeye: Don't pose questions on this forum unless you want them answered by people with a slightly different opinion than yours, dude.
As far as the scammer goes, the deed is done. Misc. forum posters will not apprehend the bad guy, although some have been helpful posting his complete background. Paypal will reimburse the OP based on his responses. Information about how another guy's credit card company would have been better, despite the fact that the OP used Paypal, is off-topic.
I have noticed that these FM scammer topics are becoming more frequent. To go forward there must be new rules in place for B&S. This has been the topic of many posts. Some people have indicated that a minimum of 100 non-B&S posts are necessary to qualify. That may not be the best route, but I think SOMETHING should be done by the moderator to help prevent this type of scam happening on a regular basis.
Like i have said before, fm forum members shouldn't be given access to the b&s board. To view the B&S board you should have to subscribe. This will fm a trail/paypal info that can be reviewed and verified. It will stop scammers pm'ing people in response to wtb ads so easily.
That is one thing that will help. Having another minimum post count could help. I am sure there are some of us prepared to be moderators to help review member posts to ensure legitimate posts.
MikeW wrote:
Like i have said before, fm forum members shouldn't be given access to the b&s board. To view the B&S board you should have to subscribe. This will fm a trail/paypal info that can be reviewed and verified. It will stop scammers pm'ing people in response to wtb ads so easily.
That is one thing that will help. Having another minimum post count could help. I am sure there are some of us prepared to be moderators to help review member posts to ensure legitimate posts.
Mike: Why wouldn't a scammer just pay the minimum $9.00 to subscribe to potentially make thousands?
If I were selling again I would state my own boilerplate rules at the end of my B&S post. That would include all the scammer traps discussed on the Misc Forum over the last few years. IMO, people should not respond to WTB. I wouldn't even have it as an option. Also, any item over $500 must be from an established member. My rules, I know, but they are still better than no rules at all.
I had 2 wtb ads, 2 scammers. Both were not subscribed. It won't stop them, but it will at least give FM information on them making it easier to verify legitimacy.
I'm inclined to agree with you Mike. Requiring registration would be a step in the right direction. It might deter folks wanting to run scams. Requiring a minimum number of posts isn't a bad idea either. Honestly, FM is so much more than the Buy and Sell board, it would be easy for someone committed to photography to get involved. A scammer could make the effort, but coupling a minimum post count with the need to subscribe and I imagine it would make a huge dent in problems of the sort reported here.
MikeW wrote:
Like i have said before, fm forum members shouldn't be given access to the b&s board. To view the B&S board you should have to subscribe. This will fm a trail/paypal info that can be reviewed and verified. It will stop scammers pm'ing people in response to wtb ads so easily.
That is one thing that will help. Having another minimum post count could help. I am sure there are some of us prepared to be moderators to help review member posts to ensure legitimate posts.
I agree. Not a perfect solution, but way better than nothing.
borderlight wrote:
Buckeye: Don't pose questions on this forum unless you want them answered by people with a slightly different opinion than yours, dude.
No, you did not just provide your opinion, you want to discount other people's opinion. You did not just answer people's question; you implied that the extra benefits from using credit cards is invalid just to proof your opinion. You also stated that bobjames opinion is "bad advice" when you have no idea why he stated his opinion.
When I replied, did I discount your experience with Paypal? No, I merely stated my experience and my benefits for using credit card.
The local police might not be able to help, because this is an interstate fraud, or even out of country. But his local police might give us a better shot.
Pubtime, snoorez, matt.garnett and Joeydgraffix, please report his fraud here with me as well: https://www.ic3.gov/default.aspx
Losing money is one thing, I'm ok even with paying for such an expensive lesson. But letting him do immoral things, ripping other people off, and thinking it's ok, I cannot stand that.
Buckeye1 wrote:
No, you did not just provide your opinion, you want to discount other people's opinion. You did not just answer people's question; you implied that the extra benefits from using credit cards is invalid just to proof your opinion. You also stated that bobjames opinion is "bad advice" when you have no idea why he stated his opinion.
When I replied, did I discount your experience with Paypal? No, I merely stated my experience and my benefits for using credit card.
.
First off, opinions are opinions no matter how you slice it. Go back and reread your questions. You stated, several times, ("does Paypal do that") that with your CC company you stand on higher ground. Some might say that's a little arrogant.
Secondly, you don't mention what CC company provides such great benefits, not that it is relevant to what the OP used. You may be right about how well your CC has served you, but it also allows you to trump anything I say about Paypal specifically. That tactic would be challenged in any debate.
I didn't imply the benefits of Paypal, I just stated them. There is a difference. I stated that "bobjames" opinion was bad advice because his reference to not leave money in Paypal doesn't make sense, or if it did to him, why? No answer from him (yet) leads me to believe he is misinformed or enjoys stirring the pot. That's like saying don't leave any credit on your credit card. Stuff like that will be challenged.
Forgot to mention, I'm the only one who wired him money. Owner of the account:
First:Vina
Last:Reitnauer
Zip:30297
He said it's a joint account with his mother.
It looks like one guy has created havoc on B&S. I don't know what impetus is needed here, but if B&S continues to be infected with assorted negative experiences it will eventually end up like photo.net B&S did when I left - a Craig's List of photo equipment. We need a sheriff. Hearing about these scams after the fact isn't cutting it anymore.
Archive 2013 · Warning: DanAnda - Scammer!
